header pic

Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: CFB51 All-Big Ten Team - Tight End #1

 (Read 4890 times)

iahawk15

  • Player
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 650
  • Liked:
Re: CFB51 All-Big Ten Team - Tight End #1
« Reply #14 on: December 11, 2017, 09:17:59 PM »
Fumagalli is the better blocker, Fant is the more talented receiver. Fumagalli is my #2, but I don't see a large gap between him and Fant.

847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 25215
  • Liked:
Re: CFB51 All-Big Ten Team - Tight End #1
« Reply #15 on: December 11, 2017, 09:52:14 PM »
Fumagalli is the better blocker, Fant is the more talented receiver. Fumagalli is my #2, but I don't see a large gap between him and Fant.
Wow.
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

iahawk15

  • Player
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 650
  • Liked:

LittlePig

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1365
  • Liked:
Re: CFB51 All-Big Ten Team - Tight End #1
« Reply #17 on: December 12, 2017, 08:54:45 AM »
I think thats what many are missing about Noah Fant.  

He may have had only 28 catches, but he averaged 17 yards per catch for 486 yards and 10 TDS.  The guy had a lot of big explosive plays that led to a lot of scores.
« Last Edit: December 12, 2017, 08:57:13 AM by LittlePig »

bayareabadger

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 7851
  • Liked:
Re: CFB51 All-Big Ten Team - Tight End #1
« Reply #18 on: December 12, 2017, 09:59:54 AM »
I voted Fumagalli. Maybe it makes me a homer, but here's my case.

He's a bigger part of the offense (targeted 24.7 percent of the time to Gesicki). We have a good indication this isn't because he's been fed the ball short because his catches keep UW ahead of or move the chains 52.2 percent of the time, compared to 47 for Gesicki. That also comes through with the fact Troy is better on yards per target, 7.7 to 7.3, despite the fact Gesicki catches 73.9 percent of balls thrown his way to 64.2 for Troy. I give bonus points for the fact UW's third-down passing was mostly throw to 81, and UW was a very good 3rd down team despite being a middling third-down running team (from the numbers, I get the sense Gesicki was used often as a short ball/screen guy, but that could just be a quirk). Throw in the fact Fum is generally regarded as a better blocker (I think?) and seemed cut and dried on my end.

The Iowa kid is interesting. He blows the other two away in yards per catch and target. He's a really big play guy, granted his catch rate is below 50 percent. Seems like a good deep target. I dunno where you put a big-play guy whose blocking is considered sub-par. It's a weird one to slot. 

ELA

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 20320
  • Liked:
Re: CFB51 All-Big Ten Team - Tight End #1
« Reply #19 on: December 12, 2017, 04:50:54 PM »
This one still tied, otherwise I'll break it momentarily

 

Support the Site!
Purchase of every item listed here DIRECTLY supports the site.